William Rodriguez, 9/11 Hero on Fox News. (finally)

I want to hear what pkc has to say* about that.

Last edited by Sunsnail on May-20-2007 at 20:02

What exactly can PKC say? No one has been able to say shit about William because they cannot.

Saying things like William Rodriguez does not have university diploma or pulling off colonolcrisps view that janitors are not the brightest people does not really count.

Rodriguez is smart, brave and saved hundreds of lives on 9/11. He has been blacked out from the media until just recently because they cannot afford to do it anymore, he is real and cannot be ignored.

Listen to yourself and make a decision. A few hard headed individuals who like to run their mouth off before thinking should not be taken into consideration.

quote:

Originally posted by culorut William Rodriguez, 9/11 Hero on Fox News. (finally)

Thanks for the link.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Mikey Mike Social outcasts are often of the opinion that they must have a drink before being able to loosen up with their inhibitions, thus being able to have a good time. There's a word that sums up this sort of behaviour, and that word is 'reject.'

quote:

Originally posted by Sunsnail I want to hear what pkc has to say* about that.

i havent watched this particular video, but i have watched a couple of others given by rodriguez.

i would like all those that might be in the middle on this issue to pay special attention to the "evidence" the "truthers" hinge far too much of their opinion on. this is ONE man's perspective of what happened on that terrible day. he is indeed a hero, but certainly hasn't ever said anything remotely "closed" from an evidenciary perspective. lots of people heard "explosions" on that day, but seriously, what do people expect a building that has been hit by a big plane and a huge fire to do? think about several floors of an office buildings that suddenly have several supporting floors taken away. think about your average office equipment and electrical structural integrity. there are so many things that could explode its ridiculous to equate explosions with explosives, especially since there isn't a single bit of corrobatory evidence.

rodriguez can only state what he saw and heard inside the building. his first testimonies i saw didn't say ANYTHING about explosions before the airlcraft struck either tower. perhaps his memory is getting better as time goes on and the truthers help him remember indeed, in the video that shaolin posted he didnt say a single thing that pointed towards explosives. the simple fact that explosives would not have been used in the way that truthers believe is evidence enough for me. explosions are not used at the base of a structure to engender a top-down collapse, 40-60 minutes AFTER the aircraft hit. its just a ludicrous assumption. im no expert like colonel but just use your common sense kids!!

rodriguez pulled people out that were "on fire", that's what melted their skin. explosives, as a general rule, dont create flame. they shatter supporting infrastructure. people THAT close to an explosive used in detonation would not have had "melted skin", they would have been blown into little pieces . again, just a little common sense goes a long way. put a firecracker in your hand an see if it melts your hand, or blows the fvcker off

too much of the truth move relies upon belief and interpretative evidence at minute zero, rather than a wholistic picture garnered in the aftermath. conspiracy theories are bred in conditions where panic and confusion are running supreme. they rely on the completely subjective and conflicting testimony that seem to fit their already-conceived notions, rather than dig through ALL the evidence available in the weeks/months/years after the event. putting so much weight into a single janitor's beliefs (though he's not a janitor now, he's a mini celebrity) isn't good science. they will quote someone like rodriguez ad nauseum, talk about "pre-demo explosives" (whatever they are, they certainly arent used by ANY demo firm in the world) but ignore the scientific impossibilities that such an opinion carry with it. just more bad science

at the end of the day, its pretty easy to see that IF this was a real american government conspiracy, they would have undoubtedly have gotten caught. if there really was substantive, unequivocal evidence, do you really think the world's engineers, scientists, media and opposing political forces would not have figured it out? this idea that theres only a few internet detectives that know the real truth is laughable in the extreme. if you piece together all the conspiracy theories (i have yet to see a single, wholistic approach from any CTer that explains everything that happened on that day) you are forced to swallow the most outlandish notions ever conceived, ignore common-sense at every turn, in favour of a theory that just doesn't make any sense at all.

what i find really confusing (in the extreme) is why these people believe it was necessary to take all the time (it would have taken MONTHS of preparation to wire those towers- a fact completely ignored by the crazies) to place explosives in the buildings, when hijacking several planes and crashing them into buildings would have been enough to engender exactly the same response (iraq & afghanistan) without anywhere near the risks. common sense. none of the conspiracy makes sense on any level. you have to have a deep-seated need to believe.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Sunsnail I want to hear what pkc has to say* about that.

i havent watched this particular video, but i have watched a couple of others given by rodriguez.

i would like all those that might be in the middle on this issue to pay special attention to the "evidence" the "truthers" hinge far too much of their opinion on. this is ONE man's perspective of what happened on that terrible day. he is indeed a hero, but certainly hasn't ever said anything remotely "closed" from an evidenciary perspective. lots of people heard "explosions" on that day, but seriously, what do people expect a building that has been hit by a big plane and a huge fire to do? think about several floors of an office buildings that suddenly have several supporting floors taken away. think about your average office equipment and electrical structural integrity. there are so many things that could explode its ridiculous to equate explosions with explosives, especially since there isn't a single bit of corrobatory evidence.

rodriguez can only state what he saw and heard inside the building. his first testimonies i saw didn't say ANYTHING about explosions before the airlcraft struck either tower. perhaps his memory is getting better as time goes on and the truthers help him remember indeed, in the video that shaolin posted he didnt say a single thing that pointed towards explosives. the simple fact that explosives would not have been used in the way that truthers believe is evidence enough for me. explosions are not used at the base of a structure to engender a top-down collapse, 40-60 minutes AFTER the aircraft hit. its just a ludicrous assumption. im no expert like colonel but just use your common sense kids!!

rodriguez pulled people out that were "on fire", that's what melted their skin. explosives, as a general rule, dont create flame. they shatter supporting infrastructure. people THAT close to an explosive used in detonation would not have had "melted skin", they would have been blown into little pieces . again, just a little common sense goes a long way. put a firecracker in your hand an see if it melts your hand, or blows the fvcker off

too much of the truth move relies upon belief and interpretative evidence at minute zero, rather than a wholistic picture garnered in the aftermath. conspiracy theories are bred in conditions where panic and confusion are running supreme. they rely on the completely subjective and conflicting testimony that seem to fit their already-conceived notions, rather than dig through ALL the evidence available in the weeks/months/years after the event. putting so much weight into a single janitor's beliefs (though he's not a janitor now, he's a mini celebrity) isn't good science. they will quote someone like rodriguez ad nauseum, talk about "pre-demo explosives" (whatever they are, they certainly arent used by ANY demo firm in the world) but ignore the scientific impossibilities that such an opinion carry with it. just more bad science

at the end of the day, its pretty easy to see that IF this was a real american government conspiracy, they would have undoubtedly have gotten caught. if there really was substantive, unequivocal evidence, do you really think the world's engineers, scientists, media and opposing political forces would not have figured it out? this idea that theres only a few internet detectives that know the real truth is laughable in the extreme. if you piece together all the conspiracy theories (i have yet to see a single, wholistic approach from any CTer that explains everything that happened on that day) you are forced to swallow the most outlandish notions ever conceived, ignore common-sense at every turn, in favour of a theory that just doesn't make any sense at all.

what i find really confusing (in the extreme) is why these people believe it was necessary to take all the time (it would have taken MONTHS of preparation to wire those towers- a fact completely ignored by the crazies) to place explosives in the buildings, when hijacking several planes and crashing them into buildings would have been enough to engender exactly the same response (iraq & afghanistan) without anywhere near the risks. common sense. none of the conspiracy makes sense on any level. you have to have a deep-seated need to believe.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN what i find really confusing (in the extreme) is why these people believe it was necessary to take all the time (it would have taken MONTHS of preparation to wire those towers- a fact completely ignored by the crazies) to place explosives in the buildings, when hijacking several planes and crashing them into buildings would have been enough to engender exactly the same response (iraq & afghanistan) without anywhere near the risks. common sense. none of the conspiracy makes sense on any level. you have to have a deep-seated need to believe.

There are some testimonies of WTC brokers, bankers etc who said that several months before 9/11, there were frequent power-downs and evactuations of the buildings, evacuations except for some people who wouldn't tell anyone who they worked for etc...

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Mikey Mike Social outcasts are often of the opinion that they must have a drink before being able to loosen up with their inhibitions, thus being able to have a good time. There's a word that sums up this sort of behaviour, and that word is 'reject.'

quote:

Originally posted by _Ocean_Drive_ There are some testimonies of WTC brokers, bankers etc who said that several months before 9/11, there were frequent power-downs and evactuations of the buildings, evacuations except for some people who wouldn't tell anyone who they worked for etc...

even with those "suspicious events" it would have taken in excess of 3000 miles of det cord, about 8000 delay devices, not to mention the amount of demoition on each floor to place the charges.

and PKC, explosives will cause burns... its not from a fire ball, unless its a petrol bomb, but an explosive is a rappidly expanding cloud of hot gases.

but appart from bombs, lets see what other devices are located in teh subteranean portions of skyscrapers taht could cause similar consequences.... now as the CT'ers above have pointed out, there were numerous blackouts and powerdowns in teh weeks leading up to 911.... well most large buildings have their transformers in teh basement. to work on the transformer youi have to power down the building. and if they were working on it that means there was something wrong with it and when a transformer fails.... it greates large showers of sparks, fireballs and lare pools of flame from teh oil boiling in the transformer tanks. video of transformer failure

a building as large as the WTC 1 and 2 towers would have had a transformer substation of similar size located int eh basement. the exlplosion alegedly heard by rodriguez could have easily been a transformer failing.

frankly far more likely than a bomb

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN I have 3 hobbies: gaming, DJing & correcting maladjusted fools on the internet.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN Yeah, I’d like to know what horrible, scarring incident in your childhood turned you into such an ignorant, intellectual-hating philistine?

thanks for the correction colonel! but if someone was in close promiximity to TNT or RDX, theres still a good chance they would get blown to pieces, yes?

and ocean drive- "frequent" powerdowns still doesn't equate with months worth of hours, which is what would have been necessary to plant explosive devices. i would also be interested in hearing which PRIVATE contracting firm was used to carry this out, since the people capable of carrying out what would be the world record for implosion all work for private demo firms.

quote:

With the press of a button at 5:47 PM on October 24, 1998, Detroit Mayor Dennis Archer dropped the J.L. Hudson Department Store from his city’s skyline and into the history books and record books. Hudson’s was the tallest department store in the country and was second in square footage only to Macy’s anchor Store in New York. It dominated the retail market in the city through the 1970’s before closing its doors in 1983. ... Under CDI direction, Homrich/NASDI’s 21 man crew needed three months to investigate the complex and four months to complete preparations for CDI’s implosion design. During that period, the lower two basements of the structure were filled with engineered fill and the perimeter basement walls bermed to 1st basement level with soil to support perimeter walls which would surely have failed under soil and hydrostatic loads once the horizontal support of the Hudson’s internal structure was removed by the implosion. ... CDI’s 12 person loading crew took twenty four days to place 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on columns on nine levels of the complex. Over 36,000 ft of detonating cord and 4,512 non-electric delay elements were installed in CDI’s implosion initiation system, some to create the 36 primary implosion sequence and another 216 micro-delays to keep down the detonation overpressure from the 2,728 lb of explosives which would be detonated during the demolition. source

^^ see how much time and effort a building a lot smaller took? id really like to know where the government hid the thousands of feet of detonating cable too...

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN thanks for the correction colonel! but if someone was in close promiximity to TNT or RDX, theres still a good chance they would get blown to pieces, yes? and ocean drive- "frequent" powerdowns still doesn't equate with months worth of hours, which is what would have been necessary to plant explosive devices. i would also be interested in hearing which PRIVATE contracting firm was used to carry this out, since the people capable of carrying out what would be the world record for implosion all work for private demo firms. ^^ see how much time and effort a building a lot smaller took? id really like to know where the government hid the thousands of feet of detonating cable too...

Perhaps my post wasn't clear enough, but I meant over the period of those "several months" there were power-downs. Does that give enough time?

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Mikey Mike Social outcasts are often of the opinion that they must have a drink before being able to loosen up with their inhibitions, thus being able to have a good time. There's a word that sums up this sort of behaviour, and that word is 'reject.'

quote:

Originally posted by _Ocean_Drive_ Perhaps my post wasn't clear enough, but I meant over the period of those "several months" there were power-downs. Does that give enough time?

not unless those powerdowns lasted several months, which they obviously didn't.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by _Ocean_Drive_ Perhaps my post wasn't clear enough, but I meant over the period of those "several months" there were power-downs. Does that give enough time?

its that little fact of the "where to put the 1234123565145612 feet of det cord" that still negates your argument....

although i do recall a martha stewart show where she highlighted some design tips to turn your det cord trunk lines into a "good thing"

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN I have 3 hobbies: gaming, DJing & correcting maladjusted fools on the internet.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN Yeah, I’d like to know what horrible, scarring incident in your childhood turned you into such an ignorant, intellectual-hating philistine?